Dismissed

Katreddy Surendra Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC21 Apr 2016WP/13544/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order disposing of a writ petition for mandamus. The petition sought a stay on demolition procedures while an appeal regarding construction regularization was pending. The court directed the municipality not to enforce previous rejection proceedings until the appeal or stay application was decided.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of directing the Bhimavaram Municipality not to give effect to proceedings dated 27.02.2016 until disposal of stay application or appeal.

Katreddy Surendra Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.13544 of 2016

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Heard Sri B. Chandrasekhar, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri Nimmagadda Venkateswarlu, learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent Municipality.

¶5

The prayer of the petitioner in this case is as under: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS to declare the action of the 2^nd respondent herein in not passing orders on the stay petition filed along with the appeal dated 26.03.2016 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 3^rd respondent herein not to take any coercive steps including demolition of the petitioner’s residential house bearing Door No.25-9-245, Plot No.9, Ward No.29, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District pending consideration of the appeal by the 2^nd respondent and pass such other order or orders as are deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

¶6

As it is stated that the petitioner has preferred an appeal under the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.128, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (M.I) Department, dated 22.05.2015 and the same is pending consideration before the Appellate Committee, giving effect to the proceedings dated 27.02.2016 of the Bhimavaram Municipality rejecting the application of the petitioner for regularizing his construction during its pendency would render the appeal itself infructuous.

¶7

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of directing the Bhimavaram Municipality not to give effect to the said proceedings dated 27.02.2016 until disposal of the stay application filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Committee or the appeal itself, as the case may be.

¶8

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.

¶9

__________________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶10

Date: 21.04.2016

¶11

Note:-

¶12

Issue CC by tomorrow B/o va

Katreddy Surendra Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Katreddy Surendra Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Katakam Sridhar Kumar, Vs The State of Telangana

M.Natarajan Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kshitij Infraventures Private Limited, Vs State of Telangana

Sri. Tatiparthi John Prakash, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

T. Ravinder Goud Vs The State of Telangana

Nanduri Satya Srinivasa Subramanyam, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh